Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Deviant FranoysMale/Spain Groups :iconpaleo-nazis: Paleo-Nazis
Treu zu Hoher Paläokunst
Recent Activity
Deviant for 1 Year
Needs Core Membership
Statistics 33 Deviations 577 Comments 13,301 Pageviews
×

Newest Deviations

Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (CM 9380) by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (CM 9380) :iconfranoys:Franoys 41 20 Mapusaurus roseae skeletal diagram. by Franoys Mapusaurus roseae skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 65 43 Brachs and Guests. by Franoys Brachs and Guests. :iconfranoys:Franoys 39 55 Spinosaurus aegyptiacus skulls. by Franoys Spinosaurus aegyptiacus skulls. :iconfranoys:Franoys 51 9 Giganotosaurus carolinii skeletal diagram. by Franoys Giganotosaurus carolinii skeletal diagram. :iconfranoys:Franoys 63 65 Puertasaurus reuili life restoration. by Franoys Puertasaurus reuili life restoration. :iconfranoys:Franoys 46 15 The isle Dinosaurs chart by Franoys The isle Dinosaurs chart :iconfranoys:Franoys 34 48 Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (FMNH PR 2081) by Franoys Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (FMNH PR 2081) :iconfranoys:Franoys 58 27 Carcharodontosaurus saharicus skeletal diagrams. by Franoys Carcharodontosaurus saharicus skeletal diagrams. :iconfranoys:Franoys 59 40 Carcharodontosaurus Skulls multi view. by Franoys Carcharodontosaurus Skulls multi view. :iconfranoys:Franoys 42 1 Tyrannotitan chubutensis Skeletal Diagrams. by Franoys Tyrannotitan chubutensis Skeletal Diagrams. :iconfranoys:Franoys 55 44 Tyrannotitan chubutensis skull bones. by Franoys Tyrannotitan chubutensis skull bones. :iconfranoys:Franoys 26 14 Tyrannosaurus Rex Tristan Otto skull bones. by Franoys Tyrannosaurus Rex Tristan Otto skull bones. :iconfranoys:Franoys 24 17 Wandering Allosaurus Fragilis by Franoys Wandering Allosaurus Fragilis :iconfranoys:Franoys 17 10 Tyrannosaurus Rex FMNH PR 2081 life restoration. by Franoys Tyrannosaurus Rex FMNH PR 2081 life restoration. :iconfranoys:Franoys 28 2 Spinosaurus life restoration by Franoys Spinosaurus life restoration :iconfranoys:Franoys 16 6

Favourites

Not an American Alligator... by ScottHartman Not an American Alligator... :iconscotthartman:ScottHartman 102 32 Allosaurus fragilis by SpinoInWonderland Allosaurus fragilis :iconspinoinwonderland:SpinoInWonderland 49 8 Pepe the french monster by Paleop Pepe the french monster :iconpaleop:Paleop 46 28 Parasaurolophus bust by JonaGold2000 Parasaurolophus bust :iconjonagold2000:JonaGold2000 110 18 Not a Terrible Lizard by JonaGold2000 Not a Terrible Lizard :iconjonagold2000:JonaGold2000 111 44 Blackbird nestlings by Renum63 Blackbird nestlings :iconrenum63:Renum63 116 52 Ice Age steppe bison by Renum63 Ice Age steppe bison :iconrenum63:Renum63 101 23 The croc hunter by Xiphactinus The croc hunter :iconxiphactinus:Xiphactinus 118 15 Hateg Island Fauna and Gargantuavis by Paleop Hateg Island Fauna and Gargantuavis :iconpaleop:Paleop 152 86
Journal
Age of the Killer Elasmosaurs
So, a lot of you are probably familiar with :iconnashd1:'s posts on plesiosaurs and how they aren't meek little dudes that ate only small fish and were probably a lot more complex than we thought. If you don't here are some posts made by him.
http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/12/plesiosaur-machinations-i-introducing.html
http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2014/12/plesiosaur-machination-ii-social.html
http://antediluviansalad.blogspot.com/2015/01/plesiosaur-machinations-iii-family-that.html
Of all his posts, the ones on plesiosaurs were probably my favorite, as they include many interesting ideas on the group on how they ate, how they hunted, and their social life. He most non-polycotylid plesiosaurs as opportunistic mid-level predators. However, there are a few things I would like to share on elasmosaurs, and that is their role in the food chain. You see, a lot of people think that plesiosaurs were predators of fish no bigger than 18 inches long. However, Duane makes a conv
:icon105697:105697
:icon105697:105697 12 23
Giant of Angeac/Francoposeidon by ForbiddenParadise64 Giant of Angeac/Francoposeidon :iconforbiddenparadise64:ForbiddenParadise64 12 3 Edmontosaurus Annectens / Skeletal by MrSamosaurus Edmontosaurus Annectens / Skeletal :iconmrsamosaurus:MrSamosaurus 53 5 Creatures of Albian-Cenomanian North Africa: P.T 2 by 105697 Creatures of Albian-Cenomanian North Africa: P.T 2 :icon105697:105697 29 28 The king T. rex by Asier-Larramendi The king T. rex :iconasier-larramendi:Asier-Larramendi 41 41 Plunderer from Utah by ScottHartman Plunderer from Utah :iconscotthartman:ScottHartman 404 395 Giganotosaurus carolinii skeletal reconstructions by SpinoInWonderland Giganotosaurus carolinii skeletal reconstructions :iconspinoinwonderland:SpinoInWonderland 53 60

Groups

Activity


Tyrannosaurus rex skeletal diagram (CM 9380)
The rigurous and fully restored skeletals of CM 9380, originally labeled as AMNH 973 and described by Osborn in 1905 and 1906. It was sold to CM during second world war, in fear that a japanese attack to New York could destroy all Tyrannosaurus specimens. It is the holotypic specimen , so it is the one the species was named after and Tyrannosaurus rex by definition, all of the other specimens are referred to the species. The mounted skeleton is based to a great degree in AMNH 5027, and carries several innacuracies from the time it was assambled that are very hard to correct. It is exhibited at the Carnegie museum of Natural history.
Loading...
Mapusaurus roseae skeletal diagram.
For all those who thought that Tyrannosaurus arms were small, here comes Mapusaurus, the most derived Carcharodontosaurid known (and also one of the largest, tied with Giganotosaurus). This is the one that hunted Argentinosaurus, not Giganotosaurus, and apparently it could have been social. It was the apex predator of it's enviroment.

Mapusaurus was found in the Huincul formation, and was named after the rose colored rocks it was found in and after Rose Lewtin who sponsered the expedition. It lived 97-93 million years ago (Late Cretaceous, Cenomanian age) in the Gondwanan continent, in what today is Argentina.

Several bone elements are coherent with at least one Giganotosaurus sized individual, all of the biggest axial skeleton remains match those of Giganotosaurus in size, and a maxilla, a fibula, a pubic shaft fragment, and a scapular blade fragment and an ischium could have belonged to it. The restoration is scaled to the size of this individual, although other smaller Mapusaurus bones were of course used and scaled up to match the size of the bigger remains.

This version is not completely final but it is close to it, and more deviations on this animal will come, perhaps one with the distinct individuals (at least some of them) and the rigurous skeletal/skeletals. 
Loading...
Brachs and Guests.
So here you have a chart with several Brachiosaurid specimens compared to several other animals. The groups are as follows:

Brachs (Info included in the chart)

Europasaurus.
Brachiosaurus sp.
Fusuisaurus zhaoi.
Brachiosaurus altithorax.
Giraffatitan brancai.
Breviparopus.
Cedarosaurus.

Guests: (left to right)

Palaeoloxodon namadicus: 5.2 m SH, 22 t. The largest land mammal reported, almost surely bigger than Paraceratherium. It matches and surpasses a good deal of sauropod dinosaurs in mass. But even the iconic Berlin's Giraffatitan, which is a subadult specimen, outweights it and greatly exceeds it's linear dimensions. Potter creek Brachiosaurus specimen is 2,43 times more massive.

Loxodonta africana (African elephant) 1) Jumbo: 3.23 m SH, ~6.15 t. 2) Largest known specimen; 3.96 m SH, ~10.4 t. The largest land animal alive today, and one that surpasses the smaller sauropods in size, but is still dwarfed by the bigger ones. It matches the giant theropods in size, and the biggest specimens known surpass all theropod specimens. However, the largest Brachiosaur in the chart is more that 5 times the mass of the record breaking Elephant.

Balaenoptera musculus: The largest animal to ever exist. The smaller specimen is a full grown, well fed specimen at 30 m long and 170 t, and the bigger one is the largest ever reported, with a body length of 33.6 meters, and a probable mass of 239 t asuming isometrical scaling. One specimen of Balaenoptera musculus is as heavy as several of the Brachiosaurids together.

Giraffe (Giraffa) 1) 5 m total height, 1200 kg. 2) Wold record Giraffe: 5.88 m total height and a probable mass of 2000 kg. Giraffes are the tallest land mammals to ever exist, and the largest ungulates alive today. Even Europasaurus, the smallest known brachiosaur, competes with the larger Giraffes in height and outweigths all of them.

Sauroposeidon proteles 26.9 m TL, 45-50 t. Haven't done a complete GDI on this one yet, but lateral view comparisons with Brachiosaurus, specially the torso, suggest that Sauroposeidon is lighter than the largest specimens, despite it being a bit longer and taller.

Spinosaurus aegyptiacus 15 m TL, 7.6 t .One of the largest predators to ever exist, Spinosaurus makes up for an interesting contrast with the Brachiosaurs, being short in height but very elongated. Potter creek specimen is over 7 times the mass of Spinosaurus, while Spinosaurus is almost 3 times as heavy as Europasaurus.

Futalognkosaurus dukei. 22.4 m TL, 41.4 t. Futalognkosaurus has been claimed to be one of the biggest dinosaurs ever and also bigger than Brachiosaurus. As it stands here, it is slightly smaller or comparable in size (mass) to the holotype of B altithorax and is smaller than the biggest Brachiosaurid specimens of several species. Most of them surpass it in height and body length in lateral view. So no it is not really bigger than Brachiosaurus.

***** DISCLAIMER: My Honor is called Loyalty, and my Art is Honorable – therefore I do not take credit for any other artist's skeletal or schematic references used as reference for this image. Nor do I claim them as my own.

This image is based on :iconscotthartman: (Giraffatitan, Brachiosaurus, Futalognkosaurus), :iconpaleo-king:(Europasaurus, Cedarosaurus) :iconasier-larramendi: (Loxodonta, Palaexolodon) and :iconsteveoc86: (Paluxysaurus) skeletals/schematics. ******

PD: Paleo-king's skeletals have some big differences with Hartman's, and since I started with Hartman's work and had almost everything done yet I had to adapt his skeletals in order for the chart to not look ugly ( I hope he isn't offended by this!) the changes are changing the neck posture, flexing the metatarsals closer to the ground to give the animals more plantigrade like stepping, and I also changed the limb posture to avoid GSP pose. The posture applied to Nima's sauropods limbs is similar to that of the mounted G.brancai in Berlin. ( The mount inspired me greatly after my travel to Berlin)

The mass estimations are based on vollumetric mathematical estimations (as almost every estimation that I upload) using a high precission matlab script that applies a Graphical double integration calculation.

The mass estimations are made by me and :iconspinoinwonderland: . A big thank you to him for spending his time helping us with the mass estimations, it is greatly appreciated.
Loading...
As always, the results first:
carchGDI2 by Franoys

CarchyGDItable by Franoys

Here you have the previous calculations made with the method used; graphical double integration, a type of vollumetric estimation:
A mathematical analysis on Tyrannotitan mass.

A mathematical analysis on Giganotosaurus mass.

A mathematical analysis on Spinosaurus mass.

The method consists in constructing a simplified 3D model of the animal mathematically, by building eliptical cross sections and adding them up, given two views of each of it's body sections. The analysis is performed by a matlab mathematical script with pixel accuracy. More information about the method itselft here:

www.deviantart.com/users/outgo…

I'll discuss a bit about Carcharodontosaurus here, but briefly since I believe I'll dedicate one more journal, or even more, to it.

The Carcharodontosaurus skeletal is again original research and work. Carcharodontosaurus is a largely incomplete animal, the holotype was only known by a couple of broken nassals, some pieces of a broken maxilla, bones of the occipital region, a braincase, two cervicals, a caudal vertebra and two partial chevrons, partial pubis and ischium, a femur, and a fíbula (Stromer 1931). Furthermore and with like Spinosaurus, Bahariasaurus, and Aegyptosaurus, it's remains were destroyed in the second world war.

The neotype consists of fragments of a skull, that when put togheter, is very big ( Sereno 1996) . When using Tyrannotitan to reconstruct the rear of the skull and Acrocanthosaurus to reconstruct the rest it ends at about 1.53 m long in maximum metric measurements (Currie and Carpenter 2000, Canale 2014) (far from the 1.6+ m that was reported to the press)
The skull is not only not as long as reported; it is also very narrow, and as a result, it's length alone is missleading to judge it's total size, and in fact the head does mass little compared to the more robust heads of other giant predatory dinosaurs. According to my best fit of the skull elements of the holotype and the neotype, the Neotype is an animal that would have a 12.5% bigger skull (roughly). With a skull about 1.35 m in length, the holotype of Carcharodontosaurus was not small headed, and had a similar skull/body ratio than all other Carcharodontosaurines.

The missing elements are based on Tyrannotitan, the animal that is most closely related to Carcharodontosaurus according to the latest phylogenetic analysis (Canale 2014) and also one that shares with it a bunch of very interesting characters that will be discussed in another journal. Carcharodontosaurus is NOT out of the clade that bounds Tyrannotitan, Giganotosaurus , and Mapusaurus togheter, it is in fact strongly bounded to them in Carcharodontosaurinae, a clade of derived, giant Gondwanan Carcharodontosaurids, even if another smaller clade, Giganotosaurini, bound the south american Carcharodontosaurines even more strongly. 

Carcharodontosaurus is barely any bigger than Tyrannotitan in linear dimensions according to how most of the bones compare, the Carcharodontosaurus holotype has a femur smaller than that of the Tyrannotitan holotype, it's extrapolation to SGM din 1 size is barely any bigger than the same element in Tyrannotitan paratype, and the jugal of the Tyrannotitan paratype fits almost perfectly in SGM din 1 skull. Here it is scaled to be a vague (and optimistic) 0.5% bigger in linear dimensions based on marginal differences, and is also given a slightly lengthier tail to fit the only known caudal of the Carcharodontosaurus' holotype better.

However, that couldn't prevent Tyrannotitan being more massive than Carcharodontosaurus, even when Carcharodontosaurus is based mainly on it.  
The difference, although almost negliable, is due to Tyrannotitan having a bigger pubis ( as discussed in the last journal) and a possibly wider skull and neck. The difference in skull width is conservative, because Tyrannotitan could have had a wider head that I gave it credit for; if it's skull was built similarly to Giganotosaurus. For theese journals, I took the middle ground approach for Tyrannotitan skull width. Giving Tyrannotitan a skull similar to the one I used for Giganotosaurus would augment it's mass about 50 kg, augmenting it's mass advantage over Carcharodontosaurus from 75 kg to about 125 kg. 

So, is Carcharodontosaurus the enormous, small headed 8t or 9t+ ultra-giant that some people wanted to see in it's fragmentary ( and not that impressive) remains? It seems like it isn't, but further discussion on that will be for another journal.

Here you have the Carcharodontosaurus restorations:

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus skeletal diagrams. by Franoys


References:

Stromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen. 

Paul C. Sereno, Didier B. Dutheil, M. Larochene, Hans C. E. Larsson, Gabrielle H. Lyon, Paul M. Magwene, Christian A. Sidor, David J. Varricchio, Jeffrey A. Wilson (1996): Predatory Dinosaurs from the Sahara and Late Cretaceous Faunal Differentiation. Science, New Series, Vol. 272, No. 5264 (May 17, 1996), pp. 986-991 

Juan Ignacio Canale, Fernando Emilio Novas & Diego Pol , Historical Biology (2014): Osteology and phylogenetic relationships of Tyrannotitan chubutensis Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich, 2005 (Theropoda: Carcharodontosauridae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology.

Fernando E Novas, Silvina de Valais, Pat Vickers-Rich, Tom Rich (2005): A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids

Currie P. J. & Carpenter K. 2000. — A new specimen of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (Theropoda, Dinosauria) from the Lower Cretaceous Antlers Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Aptian) of Oklahoma, USA. Geodiversitas 22 (2) : 207-246.


The results first:
tttGDIintermediate by Franoys

TyrannotitanGDI by Franoys

Here you have the previous calculations made with the method used; graphical double integration, a type of vollumetric estimation.

A mathematical analysis on Giganotosaurus mass.First of all, the results:


Conclussions , methodology, and anatomical references: 
For those who don't know which method was used, I recommend reading the previous journal entry, about a mathematical anaylsis on Spinosaurus mass , another legendary carnivorous dinosaur; and this excelent post by SVPOW. https://svpow.com/2011/01/20/tutorial-11-graphic-double-integration-or-weighing-dinosaurs-on-the-cheap/
Overall the method intends to construct a simplified 3D model of the animal by building eliptical cross sections and adding them up, given two views of each of it's body sections. The analysis is performed by a matlab mathematical script with pixel accuracy.
The skeletal used is my own bet on the animal. Sadly, and despite more than 22 years having passed since the animal was first (and very briefly) described, most of it's material is not described in detail, specially the axia


A mathematical analysis on Spinosaurus mass.Description of the method:
Graphical double integration performed by Matblab program.
We calculated the mass of the North african theropod dinosaur Spinosaurus aegyptiacus, using a graphical double integration method. We believe GDI is in itself, and without a doubt, one of the best methods to calculatte the mass of extint organisms, and the best that can be used using a multi views silhouette from the animal. The method averages a big amount of eliptical sections to aproximate the volume of a complex 3D object. The more eliptical sections, the more accurate the result will be, when a number of slices made is surpassed the result will be almost real life-like.
This matlab program utilizes digital image processing technology to analize two silhouettes from different views. It counts the number of non white pixels in every pixel-wide column from the image, and produces one slice per pixel. In response, the program is extremely sensitive to irregularities in the silho


The method consists in constructing a simplified 3D model of the animal mathematically, by building eliptical cross sections and adding them up, given two views of each of it's body sections. The analysis is performed by a matlab mathematical script with pixel accuracy. More information about the method itselft here:

svpow.com/2011/01/20/tutorial-…

Some discussing about Tyrannotitan size and overall proportions:

The skeletal used was made by me from scratch, using mainly the information (figures, measurements, and descriptions) in Novas (2005) and Canale , Novas (2014); using Sereno 1996, Coria 1995, and Currie and Carpenter 2000 to fill in the gaps, because Tyrannotitan is not complete, even if it is one of the most complete Carcharodontosaurids that we have by far and long. And it also is one to have a detailed description with a well documented supplementary materials, unlike others like Giganotosaurus which never seems to get a detailed osteological study, even 22 years after the brief and undetailed (and now vastly outdated in every possible sense) description of Mucpv Ch1.

The top view was again modified from Acrocanthosaurus. The width of the skull, and consequently that of the anterior portion of the neck, is intermediate between Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus, the two most closely related animals to Tyrannotitan, which also preserve a decent portion of their respective skulls. It wouldn't surprise me that the head was wider than what I gave it credit for, since after all, Tyrannotitan is strongly bounded to the tribe Giganotosaurini, even more so than to the subfamily Carcharodontosaurinae, which includes Carcharodontosaurus.

I gave Tyrannotitan an equivalent ribcage width as to Acrocanthosaurus based on comparisons of the vertebrae of the former with that of later. The hips however are wider, following the suggestion of a 40 cm wide hip for Tyrannotitan holotype, as per suggested by Canale 2014. If the paratype was about 7% bigger in average as Novas 2005 suggests, the hip of the paratype would be 42.8 cm wide, which was wider than the Acrocanthosaurus hip scaled to match the length of that of Tyrannotitan.

There are more indications of Tyrannotitan being bulky for it's length compared to other Carcharodontosaurids and Allosauroids, like it's femur circumference; which at 541 mm (Canale 2014 supp materials) would be greater than that of Giganotosaurus holotype ( 520 mm, Campione et al 2014). 

Tyrannotitan of course also has other peculiarities that are woth discussing and that had an impact on it's body mass; for example it's dorsal vertebrae being anteroposteriorly short. None of the vertebrae of the paratype has a centrum over 14 cm long (Canale 2014, supp materials) except one, which barely pushes 15.5 m, furtheremore the 1st and the 14th dorsal are very reduced compared to the other vertebrae wich yields a torso length of about 85% that of Giganotosaurus, which explains the (perhaps) lower than expected body length estimation.

The most cited length of 12.2 m is cited from the theropod database, and the estimation was made way before the detailed osteological study came out, and was probably based on femur scaling using Giganotosaurus as a base. However after the publication of Canale 2014 Tyrannotitan having an equivalent body length to Giganotosaurus doesn't hold up.

Tyrannotitan also shows very tall neural spines, much taller than those of Giganotosaurus. Such feature helps expanding the torso depth and incrementing it's mass, furtheremore the pubis is 11 cm longer than the measurement for Giganotosaurus in the theropod database and 10 cm longer than the extrapolated pubis length of the biggest Carcharodontosaurus specimen (SGM din 1). Even if we were to be skeptical about the extrapolation, Carcharodontosaurus (IPHG 1922) reconstructed pubis was only 1 meter long compared to a 1.26 m long femur, or 79% the length of the femur, while in Tyrannotitan the reconstructed pubis is 86% the femur length, suggesting again that Tyrannotitan had a deep torso, despite it being relatively shorter than in Giganotosaurus.

The skull elements suggest a skull of very large size, specially length; the jugal matches almost exactly in size and shape to the same element in Carcharodontosaurus (SGM din 1) and the dentary of the Tyrannotitan paratype is comparable in size to that of both Giganotosaurus specimens, so Tyrannotitan is certainly a big headed animal, as are all of the members of Carcharodontosaurinae. The preserved quadratojugal in Tyrannotitan and how it articulates and compares in size with the jugal offers valuable information on to how to restore the rear portions of Carcharodontosaurines' skulls.

Link to the Tyrannotitan restorations:

Tyrannotitan chubutensis Skeletal Diagrams. by Franoys

Carcharodontosaurus will be the next, and will come with a couple surprises. Stay tuned!

References:

Juan Ignacio Canale, Fernando Emilio Novas & Diego Pol , Historical Biology (2014): Osteology and phylogenetic relationships of Tyrannotitan chubutensis Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich, 2005 (Theropoda: Carcharodontosauridae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology.

Fernando E Novas, Silvina de Valais, Pat Vickers-Rich, Tom Rich (2005): A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids

Paul C. Sereno, Didier B. Dutheil, M. Larochene, Hans C. E. Larsson, Gabrielle H. Lyon, Paul M. Magwene, Christian A. Sidor, David J. Varricchio, Jeffrey A. Wilson (1996): Predatory Dinosaurs from the Sahara and Late Cretaceous Faunal Differentiation. Science, New Series, Vol. 272, No. 5264 (May 17, 1996), pp. 986-991

Rodolfo A.Coria, Leonardo Salgado (1995) A new giant carnivorous dinosaur from the Cretaceous of Patagonia. Nature, Vol 377 (September 21 1995)

Currie P. J. & Carpenter K. 2000. — A new specimen of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (Theropoda, Dinosauria) from the Lower Cretaceous Antlers Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Aptian) of Oklahoma, USA. Geodiversitas 22 (2) : 207-246.

Stromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen. 
As always, the results first:
carchGDI2 by Franoys

CarchyGDItable by Franoys

Here you have the previous calculations made with the method used; graphical double integration, a type of vollumetric estimation:
A mathematical analysis on Tyrannotitan mass.

A mathematical analysis on Giganotosaurus mass.

A mathematical analysis on Spinosaurus mass.

The method consists in constructing a simplified 3D model of the animal mathematically, by building eliptical cross sections and adding them up, given two views of each of it's body sections. The analysis is performed by a matlab mathematical script with pixel accuracy. More information about the method itselft here:

www.deviantart.com/users/outgo…

I'll discuss a bit about Carcharodontosaurus here, but briefly since I believe I'll dedicate one more journal, or even more, to it.

The Carcharodontosaurus skeletal is again original research and work. Carcharodontosaurus is a largely incomplete animal, the holotype was only known by a couple of broken nassals, some pieces of a broken maxilla, bones of the occipital region, a braincase, two cervicals, a caudal vertebra and two partial chevrons, partial pubis and ischium, a femur, and a fíbula (Stromer 1931). Furthermore and with like Spinosaurus, Bahariasaurus, and Aegyptosaurus, it's remains were destroyed in the second world war.

The neotype consists of fragments of a skull, that when put togheter, is very big ( Sereno 1996) . When using Tyrannotitan to reconstruct the rear of the skull and Acrocanthosaurus to reconstruct the rest it ends at about 1.53 m long in maximum metric measurements (Currie and Carpenter 2000, Canale 2014) (far from the 1.6+ m that was reported to the press)
The skull is not only not as long as reported; it is also very narrow, and as a result, it's length alone is missleading to judge it's total size, and in fact the head does mass little compared to the more robust heads of other giant predatory dinosaurs. According to my best fit of the skull elements of the holotype and the neotype, the Neotype is an animal that would have a 12.5% bigger skull (roughly). With a skull about 1.35 m in length, the holotype of Carcharodontosaurus was not small headed, and had a similar skull/body ratio than all other Carcharodontosaurines.

The missing elements are based on Tyrannotitan, the animal that is most closely related to Carcharodontosaurus according to the latest phylogenetic analysis (Canale 2014) and also one that shares with it a bunch of very interesting characters that will be discussed in another journal. Carcharodontosaurus is NOT out of the clade that bounds Tyrannotitan, Giganotosaurus , and Mapusaurus togheter, it is in fact strongly bounded to them in Carcharodontosaurinae, a clade of derived, giant Gondwanan Carcharodontosaurids, even if another smaller clade, Giganotosaurini, bound the south american Carcharodontosaurines even more strongly. 

Carcharodontosaurus is barely any bigger than Tyrannotitan in linear dimensions according to how most of the bones compare, the Carcharodontosaurus holotype has a femur smaller than that of the Tyrannotitan holotype, it's extrapolation to SGM din 1 size is barely any bigger than the same element in Tyrannotitan paratype, and the jugal of the Tyrannotitan paratype fits almost perfectly in SGM din 1 skull. Here it is scaled to be a vague (and optimistic) 0.5% bigger in linear dimensions based on marginal differences, and is also given a slightly lengthier tail to fit the only known caudal of the Carcharodontosaurus' holotype better.

However, that couldn't prevent Tyrannotitan being more massive than Carcharodontosaurus, even when Carcharodontosaurus is based mainly on it.  
The difference, although almost negliable, is due to Tyrannotitan having a bigger pubis ( as discussed in the last journal) and a possibly wider skull and neck. The difference in skull width is conservative, because Tyrannotitan could have had a wider head that I gave it credit for; if it's skull was built similarly to Giganotosaurus. For theese journals, I took the middle ground approach for Tyrannotitan skull width. Giving Tyrannotitan a skull similar to the one I used for Giganotosaurus would augment it's mass about 50 kg, augmenting it's mass advantage over Carcharodontosaurus from 75 kg to about 125 kg. 

So, is Carcharodontosaurus the enormous, small headed 8t or 9t+ ultra-giant that some people wanted to see in it's fragmentary ( and not that impressive) remains? It seems like it isn't, but further discussion on that will be for another journal.

Here you have the Carcharodontosaurus restorations:

Carcharodontosaurus saharicus skeletal diagrams. by Franoys


References:

Stromer 1931 II. Vertebrate remains from the Baharîje Beds (lowermost Cenomanian). 10. A skeletal remain of Carcharodontosaurus nov. gen. 

Paul C. Sereno, Didier B. Dutheil, M. Larochene, Hans C. E. Larsson, Gabrielle H. Lyon, Paul M. Magwene, Christian A. Sidor, David J. Varricchio, Jeffrey A. Wilson (1996): Predatory Dinosaurs from the Sahara and Late Cretaceous Faunal Differentiation. Science, New Series, Vol. 272, No. 5264 (May 17, 1996), pp. 986-991 

Juan Ignacio Canale, Fernando Emilio Novas & Diego Pol , Historical Biology (2014): Osteology and phylogenetic relationships of Tyrannotitan chubutensis Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich, 2005 (Theropoda: Carcharodontosauridae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia, Argentina, Historical Biology: An International Journal of Paleobiology.

Fernando E Novas, Silvina de Valais, Pat Vickers-Rich, Tom Rich (2005): A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids

Currie P. J. & Carpenter K. 2000. — A new specimen of Acrocanthosaurus atokensis (Theropoda, Dinosauria) from the Lower Cretaceous Antlers Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Aptian) of Oklahoma, USA. Geodiversitas 22 (2) : 207-246.


Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2017  Student Traditional Artist
Hello Franoys, may I please use your Giganotosaurus as a general base for my Mapusaurus skeleton? If so I will give you full credit for the reference.
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2017
Go ahead. I'll be sure to check your results.
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Mar 21, 2017  Student Traditional Artist
Thank you very much.
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Mar 22, 2017
You are welcome!
Reply
:iconkirkseven:
kirkseven Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2017
3D Tyranosaurus rex (Trix specimen) model. 

sketchfab.com/models/8bb05194f…
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2017
Yeah I know about that, it is really cool!
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
Hi Franoys, would it be possible for you to send me a link to the paper with the more detailed photographs of Giganotosaurus's skull?
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Dec 19, 2016
Sadly we don't have that at all. Your best bet is the 1995 description: drive.google.com/open?id=0B-K0…

And this paper, which doesn¡t help a lot with the external bones of the skull but it does include some measurements: drive.google.com/open?id=0B-K0…

I don't think there is much more about Giganotosaurus skull anatomy. I'm still waiting a detailed description xD.
Reply
:iconpaleojoe:
PaleoJoe Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2016  Student Traditional Artist
Ok, thank you.:) (Smile)  I was wondering where you got pictures(or not) of Giganotosaurus's nasal.
Reply
:iconfranoys:
Franoys Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2016
Apparently the nassals are preserved, since they are cited in Coria and Currie and appear to be preserved hereupload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia… , but yeah the nassals at my skeletal are heavily based of what Coria and Currie said about them, but not based on any photographs since the don't appear in the original description.
Reply
(1 Reply)
Add a Comment: